Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 488

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Fast and Accurate Phylogeny Reconstruction Algorithms Based on the Minimum-Evolution Principle

Desper, Richard, Gascuel, Olivier·2002·Journal of Computational Biology

Abstract

The Minimum Evolution (ME) approach to phylogeny estimation has been shown to be statistically consistent when it is used in conjunction with ordinary least-squares (OLS) fitting of a metric to a tree structure. The traditional approach to using ME has been to start with the Neighbor Joining (NJ) topology for a given matrix and then do a topological search from that starting point. The first stage requires O(n(3)) time, where n is the number of taxa, while the current implementations of the second are in O(p n(3)) or more, where p is the number of swaps performed by the program. In this paper, we examine a greedy approach to minimum evolution which produces a starting topology in O(n(2)) time. Moreover, we provide an algorithm that searches for the best topology using nearest neighbor interchanges (NNIs), where the cost of doing p NNIs is O(n(2) + p n), i.e., O(n(2)) in practice because p is always much smaller than n. The Greedy Minimum Evolution (GME) algorithm, when used in combination with NNIs, produces trees which are fairly close to NJ trees in terms of topological accuracy. We also examine ME under a balanced weighting scheme, where sibling subtrees have equal weight, as opposed to the standard "unweighted" OLS, where all taxa have the same weight so that the weight of a subtree is equal to the number of its taxa. The balanced minimum evolution scheme (BME) runs slower than the OLS version, requiring O(n(2) x diam(T)) operations to build the starting tree and O(p n x diam(T)) to perform the NNIs, where diam(T) is the topological diameter of the output tree. In the usual Yule-Harding distribution on phylogenetic trees, the diameter expectation is in log(n), so our algorithms are in practice faster that NJ. Moreover, this BME scheme yields a very significant improvement over NJ and other distance-based algorithms, especially with large trees, in terms of topological accuracy.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1089/106652702761034136

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 488

Metadata

Authors
Desper, R., & Gascuel, O.
Venue
Journal of Computational Biology
Published
2002-10
Volume
9
Issue
5
Pages
687-705
ISSN
  • 1066-5277 (ISSN-L)
  • 1557-8666
OpenAlex
W2120819924
Cited by
488
References
1
FWCI
3.13
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Fast and Accurate Phylogeny Reconstruction Algorithms Based on the Minimum-Evolution Principle. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1089/106652702761034136
The paper
Desper, R., & Gascuel, O. (2002). Fast and Accurate Phylogeny Reconstruction Algorithms Based on the Minimum-Evolution Principle. Journal of Computational Biology. https://doi.org/10.1089/106652702761034136

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.